Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:23813 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4521 of 2025 Petitioner :- Chandra Prakash Dubey Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Nagar Vikas Anubhag-4 And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Manish Misra,Sarvesh Kumar Saxena Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Manish Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sanjiv Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- "(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 18.10.2024 passed by the opposite party No.2 (Annexure No.1). (ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 02.07.2024 passed by the opposite party No.2 (Annexure No.2). (iii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to regularize the service of the petitioner from 26.08.2003 like similarly situated persons and accordingly ensure the payment of regular pension to the petitioner. (iv) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to count the ad-hoc services of the petitioner from 07.03.1995 for qualifying service for the purpose of payment of pension and other retiral dues at par with similarly situated persons in accordance with Rule 21A of U.P. Palika (Centralized) Service (21st Amendment) Rules, 2003. (v) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pay the arrears of pension to the petitioner along with admissible rate of interest." 3. Attention has been drawn towards the judgment and order dated 08.01.2024 passed by this Court in writ petition bearing Writ-A No.7384 of 2023; Suresh Kumar Sharma vs. State of U.P. & others (Annexure No.23) by submitting that the present writ petition is identical and similar to the issue which has been decided by this Court by means of the aforesaid judgment passed in the case in re: Suresh Kumar Sharma (supra). Therefore, the benefit of the aforesaid judgment may be extended to the present petitioner. 4. Sri Mishra, has further submitted that the aforesaid judgment has been complied with by the opposite parties and the PPO has been issued in favour of the petitioner. However, against the aforesaid judgment the special appeal bearing Special Appeal (Defective) No.275 of 2024 has been filed, which is pending consideration. Therefore, in the PPO it has been indicated that the benefit of order dated 08.01.2024 is provided subject to final outcome of the pending defective special appeal. 5. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the benefit of the judgment and order dated 08.01.2024 may be provided to the present petitioner in the same manner the benefit has been provided to the identically placed employee Suresh Kumar Sharma (supra). 6. Considering the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is allowed in terms of the judgment and order dated 08.01.2024 passed in the case in re: Suresh Kumar Sharma (supra) and while passing the order in favour of the petitioner, this much may be indicated that the benefit so given to the present petitioner would be subject to final outcome of the Special Appeal (Defective) No.275 of 2024. . [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 25.4.2025 Suresh/ Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench